[lit-ideas] Re: Understanding Why Newton Contributed To Human Knowledge With A False Theory

  • From: Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:48:58 -0800

Everyday conversation: "The dog is eating the rug." "Make him stop."

Biological conversation: "The dog is eating the rug." "How do you know that's a dog?" (Could be my pet hyena or a Tasmanian marsupial that resembles a canine)

Philosopher's conversation: "A knows that 'The dog is eating the rug' only if the dog is eating the rug." And so?


You seem to have given the biologist the philosopher's lines. Philosophers in their ordinary lives may have more interest in the affairs of Every Person. But since I was concerned, having been prompted by Donal, with knowing, not gnawing. You ask, 'And so?' yet the philosopher's contribution to these dialogues is given no context. If someone pointed out to me that one of my dogs was eating the rug, and I responded as the 'philosopher' does above, I think he or she would be justified in thinking me just a tiny bit disturbed.

Andreas: Astroturf is green. Except in Boise.

Robert Paul
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: